Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41329498›Full record

ArticleEuropace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology2025

Atypical atrial flutter ablation: clinical practice on patient selection, mapping, ablation strategies, and procedural endpoints-results from a European Heart Rhythm Association survey.

Giulio Falasconi, Antonio Berruezo, Martina Nesti, Maura Zylla, Mark T Mills, Michal Mazurek, Konstantinos Vlachos, Piotr Futyma, Martin Ruwald, Christian Heeger and 4 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Substrate ablation as concomitant treatment for left atrial macroreentrant tachycardia (SLICE-LAMRT): rationale and study design.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2026
    Article
  3. Validation of an imageless electrocardiographic imaging technique for the non-invasive mapping of regular atrial tachyarrhythmias.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2026
    Article
  4. Left atrial anterior wall flutter: clinical, anatomical, and electrophysiological characteristics.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2026
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Giulio FalasconiHeart Institute, Teknon Medical Centre, Calle Villana 12, Barcelona 08022, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-7128-9911
Antonio BerruezoHeart Institute, Teknon Medical Centre, Calle Villana 12, Barcelona 08022, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-5418-383X
Martina NestiCardiology Department, Fondazione Toscana Gabriele Monasterio, Pisa, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-8995-3884
Maura ZyllaDepartment of Cardiology, Heidelberg Centre of Heart Rhythm Disorders, Medical University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-9373-8132
Mark T MillsSheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5425-7739
Michal MazurekDepartment of Cardiology, Congenital Heart Diseases and Electrotherapy, Silesian Centre for Heart Diseases, Skłodowskiej-Curie 9, Zabrze 41-800, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-1991-1707
Konstantinos VlachosDepartment of Cardiac Pacing and Electrophysiology, Hôpital Cardiologique du Haut-Lévêque, CHU de Bordeaux, Pessac, France.ORCID 0000-0002-7543-3236
Piotr FutymaMedical College, University of Rzeszów, St. Joseph's Heart Rhythm Centre, Rzeszów, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-0219-7612
Martin RuwaldHeart Centre Capital Region, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-1541-309X
Christian HeegerGerman Centre for Cardiovascular Research (DZHK), Partner Site Hamburg/Kiel/Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-9014-8097
Jarkko KarvonenHeart and Lung Centre, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.ORCID 0000-0002-0686-2782
Laura PerrottaDepartment of Cardiology, Arrhythmia Unit, Careggi University Hospital, Largo Brambilla 3, Florence 50134, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-4322-1183
Diego PenelaHumanitas Research Hospital IRCCS, Rozzano, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0009-0009-7221-4829
Julian ChunCardioangiologisches Centrum Bethanien, Agaplesion Markus Krankenhaus, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-2355-6015

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsAtypical atrial flutter (AAFl) encompasses a diverse group of macro-reentrant arrhythmias with variable circuits, presenting diagnostic and therapeutic challenges. This European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) survey aimed to assess current practices across European centres regarding the management of AAFl. METHODS AND

resultsA 26-item online questionnaire distributed by the EHRA Scientific Initiatives Committee yielded 214 responses from physicians in 36 countries. Catheter ablation was considered first-line therapy by 67.6% of respondents. In patients presenting in sinus rhythm with non-inducible clinical AAFl at the time of ablation, management strategies were heterogeneous, with combined pulmonary vein isolation and substrate ablation being the most common approach (46.8%). Activation mapping was the preferred method to define the circuit (63.7%), ahead of entrainment manoeuvers. Most respondents (87.1%) used ablation lines connecting scar or unexcitable tissue, whereas only 7.5% targeted the critical isthmus alone. The most frequent endpoints were validation of conduction block (73.1%), interruption of the clinical arrhythmia (71.0%), and non-inducibility of the clinical flutter (56.5%), while non-inducibility of any atrial flutter was rarely pursued. In patients without prior cardiac intervention, the left atrial anterior wall was perceived to be the most frequently involved structure (59.4%). Finally, in case of recurrence, 74.3% of respondents preferred redo ablation.

conclusionThis EHRA survey reveals consensus on ablation endpoints but marked variability in ablation timing and strategies when AAFl is non-inducible at the time of ablation, underscoring the need for standardized protocols and further collaborative research to optimize outcomes.

Indexed as

Atrial FlutterCatheter AblationElectrophysiologic Techniques, CardiacPatient SelectionPractice Patterns, Physicians'Action PotentialsEuropeHealth Care SurveysHumansPredictive Value of TestsPulmonary VeinsRecurrenceSurveys and QuestionnairesTreatment OutcomeAtypical atrial flutterCatheter ablationSurvey

Identifiers

PMID41329498
PMCPMC12722029

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.